this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
173 points (98.3% liked)

politics

24482 readers
2802 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump urged Senate Republicans on Sunday to overrule the chamber’s parliamentarian in order to pass key parts of his sweeping domestic policy bill.

In a Sunday post on Truth Social, the president backed a call from Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) and other GOP hard-liners to ignore rulings from Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough.

The parliamentarian is the nonpartisan Senate official responsible for determining whether parts of laws meant to be passed through budget reconciliation comply with the rules for that process.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hungprocess 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Because if the Democrats had done those things, these people would be swinging at the end of ropes right now instead of ripping said copper.

The Republicans have been telling us basically my entire life (and I'm at the "joints no longer work" phase of old) They Were Gonna and the Democrats (who, due to the perverse structure of our government, were the people in the best position to head it off) have Charlie Browned the football that entire time. Are we supposed to just ignore that now that they've squandered whatever leverage they might once have had?

I get that the "true" villains are the Republicans, but the number of people left in this country who don't already know that AND will listen when told is vanishingly small.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So your plan is to give up, or try to change the Democrat party to move further left? A new party couldn't place a member on the Presidential ballot by 2028. They have to hold positions in multiple states of lower positions to do so, and that would split the possible centrists from the leftists and guarantee another Republican win.

Hating on individual Democrat members who drive the party Congress/Senate to the right makes sense. Hating on the entire party just helps lose support for their party and thereby support the "true" villains as you labeled them.

[–] hungprocess 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So your plan is to give up, or try to change the Democrat party to move further left? A new party couldn't place a member on the Presidential ballot by 2028. They have to hold positions in multiple states of lower positions to do so, and that would split the possible centrists from the leftists and guarantee another Republican win.

All excellent points against things I didn't say.

Hating on individual Democrat members who drive the party Congress/Senate to the right makes sense.

There are "individual" members driving the party right in much the same way there are "isolated bad apples" causing the police to abuse their powers. I can count on fingers the number of prominent Congressional Democrats pushing left. Even the party leadership is pushing "right, but slower" instead of left at all.

Hating on the entire party just helps lose support for their party and thereby support the "true" villains as you labeled them.

If someone sees a post online saying "Democrats should do more to fight against Evil Republicans when they eat orphans for fuel" and their takeaway is "But I don't know which Democrat specifically should have done more! Guess I'm voting for the orphan-eaters. 🤷"... then I would argue the post was not the problem.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What do you have against eating orphans? It statistically should drive down homelessness and potentially rent prices. Probably not good for the economy or moral though. Your parents died in a traffic accident, sorry kid... You're off to the buffet.

[–] hungprocess 1 points 1 day ago

Found Johnathan Swift's username 😉